ArticleNaunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology2025
Historical analysis of the directors of university institutes of pharmacology in Germany and Austria in the period 1918-1963.
Article in Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A brief history of the German Society for Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology-an overview of available sources.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Review
- The German Pharmacological Society during the Nazi regime (1933-1945) and its resurrection after World War II.Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's archives of pharmacology · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the National Socialism, pharmacology was very important. The First World War had shown the significance of chemical warfare agents, medicines were needed to treat malaria and typhoid fever, and soldiers had to be fit for fighting as long as possible. But there are large gaps in the history of German-speaking pharmacology around the period of National Socialism until today. Using the example of the directors of university pharmacological institutes in Germany and Austria between 1918 and 1963, this work aims to show how pharmacologists, like doctors in other disciplines, got expelled by the Nazis or became a part of the political racist and extreme system of the National Socialism. For this purpose, detailed information was collected for each institute director under consideration through research in the federal, state, and university archives, the archives of the German Society for Experimental and Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology (Deutsche Gesellschaft für experimentelle und klinische Pharmakologie und Toxikologie e.V., DGPT), and the specialist literature. The results were presented in graphical form. This study finds that almost two-thirds of institute directors (63%) were members of the National Socialist German Workers' Party (Nationalsozialistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei, NSDAP) and/or other National Socialist organizations between 1933 and 1945. About half (51%) of the consulting pharmacologists of the German army worked as institute directors at universities. In addition, around 40% of the institute directors conducted research directly for the German military. By looking at the reasons for expulsions, the political and racial persecution, the influence of the National Socialists on the German pharmacological community can be revealed. This work also shows the expulsion of Jewish professors from 1933 onwards and the failed attempts at denazification by the Allies after 1945. The study is the first to consolidate existing data and previously unconsidered archive material into an overall picture of the development of university pharmacological institutes during the Nazi era. The study shows deep involvement of the German pharmacological community in the National Socialist system.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.